U-NetPlus: A Modified Encoder-Decoder U-Net Architecture for Semantic and Instance Segmentation of Surgical Instruments from Laparoscopic Images
With the advent of robot-assisted surgery, there has been a paradigm shift in medical technology for minimally invasive surgery. However, it is very challenging to track the position of the surgical instruments in a surgical scene, and accurate detection & identification of surgical tools is par...
Uloženo v:
| Vydáno v: | Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference Ročník 2019; s. 7205 - 7211 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autoři: | , |
| Médium: | Konferenční příspěvek Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Vydáno: |
United States
IEEE
01.07.2019
|
| Témata: | |
| ISSN: | 2694-0604, 1557-170X, 1558-4615, 2694-0604 |
| On-line přístup: | Získat plný text |
| Tagy: |
Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
|
| Shrnutí: | With the advent of robot-assisted surgery, there has been a paradigm shift in medical technology for minimally invasive surgery. However, it is very challenging to track the position of the surgical instruments in a surgical scene, and accurate detection & identification of surgical tools is paramount. Deep learning-based semantic segmentation in frames of surgery videos has the potential to facilitate this task. In this work, we modify the U-Net architecture by introducing a pre-trained encoder and re-design the decoder part, by replacing the transposed convolution operation with an upsampling operation based on nearest-neighbor (NN) interpolation. To further improve performance, we also employ a very fast and flexible data augmentation technique. We trained the framework on 8 × 225 frame sequences of robotic surgical videos available through the MICCAI 2017 EndoVis Challenge dataset and tested it on 8 × 75 frame and 2 × 300 frame videos. Using our U-NetPlus architecture, we report a 90.20% DICE for binary segmentation, 76.26% DICE for instrument part segmentation, and 46.07% for instrument type (i.e., all instruments) segmentation, outperforming the results of previous techniques implemented and tested on these data. |
|---|---|
| Bibliografie: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
| ISSN: | 2694-0604 1557-170X 1558-4615 2694-0604 |
| DOI: | 10.1109/EMBC.2019.8856791 |